APHC010490402024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3397]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 379/2024 Between:

Smt Kuppili Sruthi ...PETITIONER AND Sri Vuddavolu Harshad ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. BONDU SEKHARA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent:

1. BALA MOHAN RAO S The Court made the following:

ORDER:

The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.70 of 2024 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, at Vizianagaram and transfer the same to the Judge, Family Court at Tirupati, Chittoor District, for trial.

2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:

I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was performed on 08.12.2022 at DPR Convention Hall, behind Srinivasam, Tirupati, as per the Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. The petitioner/wife herein pleaded that, she has been pursuing her first year MDS course in Sri Chadalawada Krishna Teja Institute of Dental Sciences & Research at Tirupati. She further pleaded that, during their wed-lock period, the petitioner/wife blessed with a female child and in view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife is staying separately along with her daughter aged about 1½ years at her parents’ house at Tirupati. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, to cause unnecessary inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband has filed F.C.O.P.No.70 of 2024 on the file of the Judge, Family Court at Vizianagaram under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of the marriage and the same is pending for adjudication.

II. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner being a woman, staying separately along with her daughter aged about 1½ years at her parents’ house at Tirupati, it is very difficult for her to travel at a distance of more than 800 Kms from Tirupati to Vizianagaram without any male support and that she was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husband seeking to withdraw the F.C.O.P.No.70 of 2024 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Vizianagaram and transfer the same to the Judge, Family Court at Tirupati, Chittoor District.

3. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that, the respondent/husband has been suffering with facial paralysis and also with neurological problems and that he is not fit to travel from Vizianagaram to Tirupati to attend the case proceedings. He further contended that there are no valid grounds to consider the request made by the petitioner/wife herein to transfer the case from Vizianagaram to Tirupati and requested this Court to dismiss the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition.

5. Perused the material available on record.

6. The material on record prima facie goes to show that the respondent/husband has filed F.C.O.P.No.70 of 2024 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Vizianagaram, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of the marriage and the same is pending for adjudication. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the petitioner/wife is staying separately along with her child aged about 1½ years at her parents’ house at Tirupati, the distance between the Tirupati and Vizianagaram is more than 800 kms, since the petitioner being a woman depending upon her parents along with her child, it is very difficult for her to travel from Tirupati to Vizianagaram to attend the divorce case proceedings which is pending before the Judge, Family Court, at Vizianagaram, on each and every adjournment without any male support and that she was constrained to file the present transfer petition.

7. The Ap